Party Loyalty in Canada: The Question of Party Identification
In a recent article in this Journal, Paul M. Sniderman, H. D. Forbes, and Ian Melzer challenge the proponents of what they characterize as the “textbook theory” of Canadian parties. They claim that their examination of the 1965 and 1968 Canadian national election studies contradicts the conclusions...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Canadian journal of political science 1975-12, Vol.8 (4), p.543-553 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | eng |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | In a recent article in this Journal, Paul M. Sniderman, H. D. Forbes, and Ian Melzer challenge the proponents of what they characterize as the “textbook theory” of Canadian parties. They claim that their examination of the 1965 and 1968 Canadian national election studies contradicts the conclusions of almost every analyst of parties and voting in Canada. While a little debunking of long-held interpretations is always valuable in any discipline, one should exercise caution. Conventional wisdom does not usually acquire that status without containing at least some small measure of validity. In this case I must conclude that more confusion has been created than has been cleared away and previous analysts should not be considered to have erred quite as much as the authors of this article would like us to believe. Sniderman et al. argue that, because of “an obsession with national unity” on the part of political parties and a fear of fragmentation which produces undifferentiated politics of accommodation, “Canadian voters tend to lack strong loyalties to the older parties, at least when compared to the Americans and the British. As a consequence, electoral support for the older parties in Canada tends to be unstable.” The first part of this proposition asserts that concern with national unity necessarily produces such similar policy positions that parties are interchangeable, being distinguished only by their leadership. Although this is an interesting proposition, it will not be dealt with here. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0008-4239 1744-9324 |